Unconditional surrender
James Forsyth 2:09pm
The front benches on both sides felt that they had to say that they accepted Kelly in full and so Harriet Harman and Sir George Young did just that. One member of the shadow Cabinet told me earlier this week the only option for the political class is unconditional surrender. But it does seem like there might be some areas where Kelly is watered down. The bit of Sir George Young’s statement that stood out to me was on commuting rules, where the shadow Leader of the House said: “As Sir Christopher says, IPSA will need to look closely at the proposals in this report. There are legitimate concerns with aspects of it, particularly the rules surrounding who was expected to get back to their constituencies at night.” Also the emphasis placed by Harman and Young on employment law when talking about the work of relatives suggests that there might be a legal way out of this problem.
The fact that five British servicemen had died in Afghanistan today meant that the House knew it couldn’t be seen to be getting outraged about changes to its expenses. But when Bercow announced that the new head of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority will be paid up to £100,000 a year, significantly more than a backbench MP, there was a sustained jeer.
Interestingly, Cameron left the Chamber before Harman’s statement, which Brown stayed for. Cameron’s circle had an intense debate earlier in the week about whether there was a way Cameron could outflank Brown on this issue, perhaps by calling for the immediate implementation of Kelly. But they decided against that.
The next thing on today’s agenda is a Cameron convened meeting of Tory MPs at 2.45. Then, Cameron’s Europe press conference at 4.
Previous
se1man
November 4th, 2009 2:30pm Report this commentI saw the headline "Unconditional surrender" and thought this post was about the general capitulation to the EU/Lisbon...
Vulture
November 4th, 2009 3:21pm Report this commentMe too. Its white flag time in Westminster on all fronts. UKIP have produced a genius poster of a Janus-faced Dave with his two referendum quotes - one promising it - the other retracting it. The slogan: 'EU-turn if you want to. UKIP is not for turning'. And: 'Vote Tory. Get Brussels'.
Brilliant - and highly damaging because true.
I fear old custard features will deeply regret his 'cast iron' phrase. It may even sink him.
Battle 2807
November 4th, 2009 3:29pm Report this commentIt is now crunch time for Mr Cameron. What he comes up with this afternoon is going to be the decider on whether he wins the election or we have a hung parliament.
Publius
November 4th, 2009 3:50pm Report this commentI don't think that particular surrender is what the Speccie team want to talk about. But we'll see. I await Mr Chamberlain's broadcast at 4pm.
Frank P
November 4th, 2009 3:50pm Report this commentSe1man
"I saw the headline "Unconditional surrender" and thought this post was about the general capitulation to the EU/Lisbon..."
Me too, Lambiff man.
I posted the following on an earlier thread, which has now expired, as part of a comment on the European Constitution aka Lisbon Treaty:
"I saw Cameron interviewed outside his Notting Dale gaff this morning; on the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty yesterday:
I'm going to make sure it never happens again!" he expostulated.
I was hoping the large bang that accompanied these ludicrous words was him being shot. Then I realised that it was the sound of a stable door slammed shut, accompanied by the whinnying of the horse long gone.
A bit like the virgin who after her first good rogering says, "I'm going to make sure I never lose my virginity again." "
(As for the rape; at least we can strangle the ensuing unwanted bastard at birth - who has the ligature?).
2trueblue
November 4th, 2009 3:59pm Report this commentSurrender, what surrender? MPs have a very cushy situation.They have been given up to 6 yrs to sort their 2nd home situations. Of course they can now sit and chose if the market has risen ehough to make one last financial killing on the taxpayers servicing of their mortgages. In any other walk of life this would not happen. As said before if the same laws applied to MPs as to the rest of us there would have been more rigerous research into the flippers. To say that it would take too much time etc is rubbish. The details are with the land registry.
Liz Brown
November 4th, 2009 5:09pm Report this commentsorry folks - it was not David Cameron who surrendered. Once it had been signed into effect, he had no option. Your fury (and mine) should be at Bliar who got us into this mess and Brown who signed the treacherous Lisbon Con/Treaty
As to expenses - for goodness sake, nothing looks set to happen for another 5 years - jeez...........
Nigel Sedgwick
November 4th, 2009 5:12pm Report this commentUnconditional surrender.
That would be by the people's elected representatives to a combination of the executive and the bureaucracy!
Parliament totally cowed by those they oversee on our behalf.
MPs should have disciplined their own members who committed the worst excesses (including, IIRC, one serving and one ex minister) by having them charged with fraud, changed their rules so that they were more appropriate, and had MPs refund much if not all of the sums claimed over the most recent recent years and not compliant with the improved rules. The rules should always have included the definition that a second home must be (i) necessary given their travel time and (ii) the lesser home of those in their constituency and London.
Best regards
HairyNoddy
November 4th, 2009 8:13pm Report this commentHow can Camoron guarantee no further loss of powers? There was already legislation in place to ensure that our constitution should have been respected, but the EU juggernaut just crashed over the top of it regardless.
JohnAnt
November 5th, 2009 1:30am Report this commentWhy should the Head of IPSA not be paid more than MPs?
They just rubber-stamp EU diktats.
He OTOH saves us money.
Back to top